Del what you uncovered is pure cyber gold.
Pat Brady is an example of a true hero. Kerry isn?t. The General?s selfless actions as a young man were truly ?in the highest tradition of the military service?. Kerry?s actions as a young man, under oath and in front of Congress, were not. Gen Brady sees, as many of us do, that Kerry clearly gamed the system to leave Vietnam eight months early, leaving his Band of Brothers behind for a cushy Admiral?s Aide ?featherbed? job.
A true hero like Pat Brady, brought ?51 seriously wounded? of his Band of Brothers back to safety in just one day, and stayed there for ?364 days and a wake up.?
Kerry has no shame, and has demonstrated he?ll ?do what it takes? to win the Presidency. His use of ex-POW McCain is another example. Kerry?s use of the Bush - McCain Election 2000 Primary in-house Republican ?family mud fight? to say that it follows that Kerry?s war story doesn?t smell, just won?t hold Mekong River water.
John McCain, who while afflicted with numerous broken, improperly set bones and enduring regular torturous beatings, when offered a chance to go home by his North Vietnamese captors turned them down out of true loyalty to his POW ?Band of Brothers.? McCain would take no offer to go home early, that all in his Band of ?Hanoi Hilton? Brothers weren?t offered as well.
Navy ?Newbie? Lieutenant (Junior Grade) John Forbes Kerry?s loyalty to his Band of Brothers faded fast. He bailed out on his Swiftee brethren, as swiftly as he could run the transfer request paper work through. Any one familiar with the Navy in Vietnam knows Kerry clearly ?Boston lawyer?ed? his way out of combat duty eight months early using an obscure, little known and little used Military Regulation.
Pat Brady?s, ?Kerry may be the only person in history who took advantage of a Navy regulation that allowed him to leave his command after 4 months for 3 purple hearts, none of which ever caused him to miss a day of duty? statement also shouts this out loud and clear.
Deciding to vote for Kerry vs. Bush is one thing, but doing so because one believes that some how Kerry and McCain are Vietnam ?hootch mates? is fallacious.
Vietnam Vets everywhere shout out a Band of Brothers ?OO-RAH? to Gen Brady for taking the time to share his assessment of John Forbes Kerry?s fitness for commanding the Band of Brothers and Sisters who live ?across the fruited plain? and ?from sea to shining sea.?
I have permission to publish the following editorial written by Major General Patrick Brady, US Army (ret), dated 16 August 2004, as was published in the Northwest Veterans Newsletter.
Gen Brady is a Medal of Honor receipient, and as a way of introduction, here is the citation:
Major Patrick H. Brady, U.S. Army, Medical Service Corps, 54th Medical Detachment, 67th Medical Group, 44th Medical Brigade. Near Chu Lai, Republic of Vietnam, 6 January 1968 demonstrated conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty. He distinguished himself while commanding a UH-1H ambulance helicopter, by volunteering to rescue wounded men from four sites in enemy held territory all of which were reported to be heavily defended by and in close proximity to the enemy forces. Throughout that day, Major Brady utilized three helicopters to evacuate a total of 51 seriously wounded men, many of whom would have perished without prompt medical treatment. Major Brady's bravery was in the highest tradition of the military service and reflects great credit upon himself and the U.S. Army.
Here is his editorial:
America has no kings or queens but we do have nobility ? our nobility is called Veterans. That nobility is responsible for the bounty that is America but tragically their influence has faded in recent years and the values they died for are under attack. But this election year they are back in demand and some have said the veteran vote could decide this election. It may have put Bush in the White House. With this in mind, John Kerry is seldom seen with out his band of brothers and constantly plays the? hero? card as a cornerstone of his bid for president, indeed, as the definition of who he is. Kerry defines patriotism as ?keeping faith with those who wear the uniform of this country. He also brags that he ?defended this country as a young man?. If Missouri is the show me state, Veterans are the show me voters ? we are not much for words, deeds are our stock in trade. Lets look at Kerry?s deeds.
Before Kerry played his ?hero? card, he played the atrocity card. When Kerry came back from Vietnam he joined with Jane Fonda and in 1971 denounced ?those who wear the uniform? as terrorists-like rapists and assassins who ?cut off heads, taped wires ? to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, shot at civilians, razed villages, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks? ? and said he ?committed the same kinds of atrocities as thousands of others?. He made these charges under oath. Kerry says today that he would have framed some of what he said in 1971 differently. But he does not say he lied, which he did, nor does he apologize. How can one properly frame the denunciations of ones comrades in arms as modern day Genghis Khans?
The very day that Kerry was calling Vietnam veterans? war criminals the family of one of those ?war criminals?, Michael Blanchfield, was posthumously receiving the Medal of Honor for Michael who had thrown himself on a grenade to save the lives of his comrades. How different from Kerry was the way this man kept faith with those who wore the uniform with him. How different from Kerry was the manner Michael defended his country.
He could have attacked the war without attacking the warrior. He could have questioned policy without supporting the communists? claim that our soldiers were war criminals. He could have kept faith with those who wore the uniform with him. But he did not and he should be held accountable.
By every measure, the Vietnam veteran has been an exceptional citizen; but there is one disturbing statistic -- their suicide rate. In the first 5 years after discharge the rate was 1.7 times higher than non-veterans. After 5 years it was less. This may have been due to the treatment the Vietnam veteran received from the media ? and the anti war movement led by Kerry -- in the early years after the war. Living with the scars of war is difficult, for some unbearable, but all veterans suffer. The Vietnam veteran suffered physically as much, perhaps more than any veteran of the past century, but no veteran has suffered the mental agony of that veteran.
What Kerry/Fonda and the media elite did to the Vietnam veteran and his family is deplorable. They opened a gash in his psyche and then rubbed salt in it. Not just the living but also those who died and their families who questioned if a loved one is a war criminal. And the POWs some who believed the Kerry/Fonda cartel extended the war, increased their torture and filled more body bags. Whether Kerry and Fonda have blood on their hands is debatable but there is no doubt they have salt on them.
Kerry?s ?hero? card is based on medals he received in Vietnam and is much celebrated, and unchallenged, by the mainstream media. I know many Medal of Honor recipients who have received less publicity for their medal than Kerry has for his. But medals don?t make a hero. It is how one uses medals that make a hero. Every honest soldier knows that medals are a function of circumstance, even happenstance, but most of all the support of ones fellow warriors.
I was awarded the Medal of Honor; but my fellow soldiers who supported me in the actions and took the time to write it up earned it. I wear it for them, they own my medals. And every Medal of Honor recipient and hero I know believes as I do. Medals should be a sign of patriotism, a symbol of sacrifice, support and defense of a great nation. The highest form of patriotism is service to our youth; heroes also wear their medal for them to signal the importance of courage. Heroes do not use their medals for personal political gain. As I said they are not theirs to use.
Senator Kerry threw his medals away (or ribbons, they are symbolically the same), a political act very difficult for any veteran to understand. He must have been proud of them for he wore them even on his fatigues, in violation of all regulations. But they were not his. They belonged to those who he served. By that act he symbolically denounced his fellow veterans -- again. Does one keep faith with those who wear the uniform by throwing away their medals?
But perhaps most telling of his leadership qualities is his use of his Purple hearts to abandon his band of brothers, his command, on a technicality. Kerry may be the only person in history who took advantage of a Navy regulation that allowed him to leave his command after 4 months for 3 purple hearts none of which ever caused him to miss a day of duty. In my experience men fought to stay with their band of brothers, especially commanders. All the commanders I know would get out of a hospital bed to be with their men. Some one had to take his place; someone probably less experienced who would have to learn the ropes. That put his command more at risk than if he stayed. It is not hard to understand why those who stayed in combat for the full year are upset with Kerry.
And veterans today would be upset with Kerry?s support of Flag Burning his non-support of weapons systems and his 12 votes against military pay raises. But his use of veterans and mis use of his medals should bring into serious question his loyalty, integrity and character all of which equal leadership. He is not fit for command.